IN THE HIGH comm" OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALoR§:'"'*---,y
Dated this the 2"" November, 2009
Before
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE HULUVADI y_ do RAJI:/IESH:
Criminal Petition 5309: /__
Between: V' ' A'
I Bharat S/0 A V Ramaiah,__23 yrs
2 Smt Shakunthala W/o A V'--}5ea:nafi_ah g u
55 yrs V
Both are r/o #,2'§:'Q, ?_.'--'d Main, 1.18%' Crr).§Sv".j*~. V' . 2
Mzllleshwargreav ,S;iri1p.ige Road ' "" "
Bangalorei'56Gy_G*03""'"-.__ b '- Petitioners
{By sn K Dhir2rjevKoii:;af,.}5\;§~e;) '
And.' V
1. State of KarnaI;1ka 'T' by.PsV1f
M;:H.etshw21rfi:ny Po} ice Sthtioi1
Bangalore 3 "
1 * .Ma11jVu1a.D!o' 'Narasilnha Murthy
'V V Who B'hafat1i,eee.23:.yrs
_ "Om: 'R/o # 668, 1" Main
' 3/ijayangnd---E'Jagz1r, Nandini Layout
E'ang2:fEore* 560 096
Pres-=:nti;.y r/a # 280, 2"" Main
= _ .. ,l8"' Cross, Maileshwaram
V Sampige Road, Bangalore 3 Respondents
‘A A10
_j{By”sn o Bhavani Singh, SPF’; Sri K Chandrappa
Admfor R2) \§¢/
The complaint has been filed when the parties were at logger heads and
subsequentiy, they have entered into some understanding and t%’i”;s is at
matrimonial affair. As such, there is wide ampiitude to go
understanding and to lead a harmonious life. in the eircumsftzinces, it». ‘cann’ot
be exactly said that there is a complaint made forthe offcincevvpéinisheifkiletinder V
S498 A, IPC.
Whiie exercising power under VS’.-4.82, Ci’.’E’C;”ant1 invvéewf of the ratio”?
laid down. by the Apex Court in the case J0ShlV”‘V.S’ ‘State offlatyana &
Am” – ILR 2003 KAR I785, perrnittirig Stlchtset:E}enie~:1ts, partifesuere permitted
to cornpound the offence and conseqnentijt, :fthe«’«..»conjpl_a5.int filed before the
Maiieshwairfztm Police ‘St.-at-iofiifor”t.he”of’fence punishabie under S.498A, IPC in
Crime No. §64f/2009iandf’pend.ing- tie-fofé the concerned Magistrate is quashed
‘§’)’t:§[‘i[‘fi£)’l1 is aiiowedi V I / –
iiiii JUDGE
M .